The Uses of Power
Power in human relationship, what IS this thing? We hear phrases like "speak truth to power," and "the rich and powerful," and "an abuse of power." Such phrases show an attitude of fear, subservience, enmity, moral superiority. Power, it would seem, is by nature a force with great destructive potential, and inherently bad, morally speaking. "Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely." I can think of no better synopsis of the Ring in Tolkien's famous stories, in which the best choice was NOT to use that power, but rather to destroy it. As a born-and-bred American, I completely resonate to this view of power: "Government is best which governs least," that blessed Jeffersonian maxim!
But as I have aged and observed a wider variety of power sources, I have seen a strange paradox. A power vacuum, or a FAILURE to exercise legitimate power, is at least as destructive as an abuse of power. What does THAT say about those dark views of power? There is a flip-side, and its essence must lie behind the phrase just now used "legitimate power."
So rather than define it, what comes to mind as examples of legitimate power? Metropolitan Joseph. Pope John Paul 2. A police force, who, though being in a gang-infested neighborhood, maintains order by exercising power (law, physical force, threat of lethal force) against gang members; a police force, who, though possessing such power shows no threat to the law abiding and innocent residents of the neighborhood. These are the examples that come to my mind, and as they came I noticed that mostly what came to mind were specific people, like the good Church leaders, and this suggests that legitimate power associates with human goodness. This is a crucial point, so let's set it apart.
Power in the abstract is simply a force that can destroy, and as an abstraction is frightening. Really. It's not a misplaced fear, but a fear reflecting a healthy understanding. Power without the human element is power with no connection to morality. And isn't that interesting? Morals only have meaning in the context of human beings. Wild animals frighten us BECAUSE they are WILD, meaning they have no moral compass to guide that natural power--grizzly, mountain lion, shark, etc. In this is the first lesson of legitimate power: to be legitimate it must reflect human goodness. Think about it: the greater the power, if the PERSON in whom that power rests is a good moral person in his personal life and in his exercise of power, then all those fears of power disappear! On the contrary such Leader (or Ruler) is loved by most of the people.
And now the subject opens up beyond the scope of this writing. I hear rejoinders. What do you mean, 'human goodness?' Isn't justice blind? Doesn't that put cold limits on the exercise of power for compassionate reasons? Just because the man in power is nice doesn't make him a good ruler! And so on.
To end this, then, let me refer to two very unlike sources as examples of the real principle here, that power is made legitimate by being exercised with true goodness (the old word is "righteousness"). To see examples I refer you, first, to the books in the Bible that show how God would set up his state: Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy (skip the genealogies). And for a fantastic image of this read the books of Frank L. Baum, especially The Patchwork Girl of OZ. The queen of Oz, Ozma, is a fine image of a nearly all-powerful ruler whose judgments are both just and compassionate. In both of these examples one conclusion strikes me as clear: the legitimate use of power REQUIRES a coinciding of ultimate power with ultimate righteousness, and for this reason can only be approximated imperfectly in this fallen world. This is the second lesson of legitimate power.
May the Lord grant you (and me) strength to persist in exercising the power we have legitimately, and, where we have not, may we find grace to gracefully amend.
End note:
This writing was, deliberately, a "1st pass" posting. The fun of writing for me involves word craft and idea shaping, so that the final product has a concise, unified feel. The result is highly gratifying. But, with the re-start of my blogging exercise I want to put out ideas with much less second effort (and third, and forth) to make it "just so." This is the first, and it was fun.
But as I have aged and observed a wider variety of power sources, I have seen a strange paradox. A power vacuum, or a FAILURE to exercise legitimate power, is at least as destructive as an abuse of power. What does THAT say about those dark views of power? There is a flip-side, and its essence must lie behind the phrase just now used "legitimate power."
So rather than define it, what comes to mind as examples of legitimate power? Metropolitan Joseph. Pope John Paul 2. A police force, who, though being in a gang-infested neighborhood, maintains order by exercising power (law, physical force, threat of lethal force) against gang members; a police force, who, though possessing such power shows no threat to the law abiding and innocent residents of the neighborhood. These are the examples that come to my mind, and as they came I noticed that mostly what came to mind were specific people, like the good Church leaders, and this suggests that legitimate power associates with human goodness. This is a crucial point, so let's set it apart.
Power in the abstract is simply a force that can destroy, and as an abstraction is frightening. Really. It's not a misplaced fear, but a fear reflecting a healthy understanding. Power without the human element is power with no connection to morality. And isn't that interesting? Morals only have meaning in the context of human beings. Wild animals frighten us BECAUSE they are WILD, meaning they have no moral compass to guide that natural power--grizzly, mountain lion, shark, etc. In this is the first lesson of legitimate power: to be legitimate it must reflect human goodness. Think about it: the greater the power, if the PERSON in whom that power rests is a good moral person in his personal life and in his exercise of power, then all those fears of power disappear! On the contrary such Leader (or Ruler) is loved by most of the people.
And now the subject opens up beyond the scope of this writing. I hear rejoinders. What do you mean, 'human goodness?' Isn't justice blind? Doesn't that put cold limits on the exercise of power for compassionate reasons? Just because the man in power is nice doesn't make him a good ruler! And so on.
To end this, then, let me refer to two very unlike sources as examples of the real principle here, that power is made legitimate by being exercised with true goodness (the old word is "righteousness"). To see examples I refer you, first, to the books in the Bible that show how God would set up his state: Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy (skip the genealogies). And for a fantastic image of this read the books of Frank L. Baum, especially The Patchwork Girl of OZ. The queen of Oz, Ozma, is a fine image of a nearly all-powerful ruler whose judgments are both just and compassionate. In both of these examples one conclusion strikes me as clear: the legitimate use of power REQUIRES a coinciding of ultimate power with ultimate righteousness, and for this reason can only be approximated imperfectly in this fallen world. This is the second lesson of legitimate power.
May the Lord grant you (and me) strength to persist in exercising the power we have legitimately, and, where we have not, may we find grace to gracefully amend.
End note:
This writing was, deliberately, a "1st pass" posting. The fun of writing for me involves word craft and idea shaping, so that the final product has a concise, unified feel. The result is highly gratifying. But, with the re-start of my blogging exercise I want to put out ideas with much less second effort (and third, and forth) to make it "just so." This is the first, and it was fun.
Comments
Post a Comment